Tuesday November 11 will be the 50th anniversary of the dismissal of the Whitlam government by the then Governor-General Sir John Kerr. It was a dramatic day in our federal political history, with Malcolm Fraser appointed prime minister. Fraser then led the Coalition to a landslide victory in the subsequent election.

The debate about – and in some quarters, the rage over – what Kerr did continues today, with opinions divided over its impact on Australian political history.

To talk about their memories of the time, we’re joined by journalist Niki Savva, who was a reporter working in the parliamentary press gallery, and David Solomon, press secretary to Prime Minister Gough Whitlam during the crisis.

On the atmosphere on November 11, Solomon recalls the mood of Whitlam office:

We expected […] this would be a good day. This was the day when the governor-general would agree to a half-Senate election and that, we thought, would be the circuit breaker in the problem over getting supply. Of course, during the time, it turned totally on its head. And we finished up wondering just what had happened and why, and how it had happened.

[When the news broke] I was actually having lunch in the Lobby along with quite a lot of other people and it was a question of hurrying back to Parliament House to find out as much as we could. Where there was, I must say, very little information at all. All that people knew was that the government had been dismissed and people were, including me, were fairly hopeless about getting any information.

Savva explains the general state of shock after the announcement:

I’d gone out at lunchtime to go and do a bit of shopping because I didn’t think very much was going to happen that day. And when I drove back, I could usually find a parking spot right next door to the steps and just walk in. I had to go all the way up to Camp Hill to find a spot. And there was a chap from the parliamentary library who was literally running past me. Yelling out, “Gough’s been sacked!” And I thought, what the hell? So I started running, too, and got back into the building. And by that time, word had got around. But it was […] I don’t know, a state of shock.

On whether a dismissal could happen again, both agree that while the same powers exist today, things have now changed. Solomon says:

All of the facts are still the same. It could happen. I don’t think it is likely […] I think the psyche of all the political parties was affected by what happened on November 11 and I think that they do not want it ever to happen again. It is one of those events that must be avoided at all costs.

In Savva’s view:

It would also need people of similar character to the main figures of the time, like a Whitlam, a Kerr, a Fraser, a [Reg] Withers [Leader of the opposition in the Senate]. And do any people like that exist in parliament today or at Government House? I don’t think so. But you’re right about […] having a dampening effect on politicians and whether they would want to put the country through something like that today, when we are a different society, much more polarised. I think we survived 1975 in reasonable shape, even though a lot of friendships were shattered and trust was broken.

A half-century on, neither Savva or Solomon have softened their views. Savva says she remains “outraged”:

I am still outraged because I don’t think it was appropriate for a governor-general to sack an elected government and particularly to deceive in such a contrived manner what his intentions were. He did not alert Whitlam to the possibility that he might sack him and I think that is one of the most egregious things that happened.

Solomon says time and the further releasing of information has only reinforced his view:

No, I haven’t changed. I’ve become, in fact, even more concerned about what Kerr did, the more information we have about why Kerr acted as he did and the material that he had before him when he decided to do this. In particular, first of all, the correspondence with the palace, but secondly, the advice he got from one of the High Court judges who he consulted, namely Sir Anthony Mason, who said, yes, you have the power to sack the government, but you must first of all alert the government to the fact that you are considering doing it. And I think that was absolutely sound advice. It should have been followed. And if it had been, the crisis would have been very different and the resolution would have been different.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Michelle Grattan, University of Canberra

Read more:

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.